Never ending thread . . .

[Mike Arman]

>Fellow listers:
>
>It would be impolitic to suggest that the never-f*cking-ending thread on Mr.
>XXXXX come to an end.  I won't do that, although a powerful case has been
>made over the last few weeks in dozens of messages that the concept of
>caveat emptor is as pertinent today as ever -- if not more so.
>
>A cautionary note:  Several of you have suggested that Mr. XXXXXX cries
>"slander" when it suits him.  I have substantial experience in the world of
>libel/slander law.  Mr. XXXXX's threats are not necessarily empty, and it
>would be a gosh darned shame if any of us had to sell our precious quattros
>in order to fend off a slander or libel suit.
>
>Shaun Mullen
>Planet Earth
> 

Shaun is correct. While the truth is considered to be an absolute defense,
it can cost a bundle to determine the truth.

There are, however, some other ways to resolve this situation in the event
there is no financial repentance forthcoming on the part of Mr. X.

Was any part of this transaction performed via the Postal Service? If so,
you may be able to convince a postal inspector that this constitutes mail
fraud, and if there is a pattern of this, there may very well be some jail
time in the alleged perpetrator's future. It is also possible that they
will close the mails to him - he won't be able to mail anything out
(assuming he uses a return address), and no US mail will be delivered to
him. That essentially puts him out of business, or at least puts a major
crimp into it.

Was any part of this transaction performed via FAX? If so, that may
constitue wire fraud, and the FBI moves against these guys. It isn't much
of a stretch to expand the definition of "wire" fraud to include the
internet, because it goes over phone lines. A few years ago, I had a visit
from the local FBI guys. They were inquiring about a transaction involving
an aircraft lease which was never funded even after the first and last
payments had been made (by certified check). Fortunately for me, I had a
copy of the e-mail in which I strongly advised the buyer that the leasing
company appeared fraudulent and DON'T send them any money (he did anyway).

Once the Feds realized I was on the up and up, I was off the hook. As a
result of copies of numerous faxes from the fraudster, he was convicted on
several charges of wire fraud, and got NINE YEARS in the Federal slammer.

Has anyone thought of filing in small claims court against this guy? If he
had twenty or thirty lawsuits to deal with, he might decide to look for an
alternative line of business, perhaps even one where the concept of
customer satisfaction wasn't a totally alien idea. He would have to answer
each and every one of the lawsuits, because if he didn't, he would lose
them by default.

Once you have a default judgement, you can hand it to the local Sheriff,
who will seize three times the amount of the judgement (and do it at
gunpoint, if necessary - then he goes to jail, because he is in REAL
trouble now!) and sell it at auction. If it doesn't bring enough to satisfy
the judgement, the Sheriff just goes back for more.

If you really, really want to be mean, you can SELL the judgement to your
choice of collection agencies (do a search on "We buy judgements"), you get
paid some percentage, and THEY make his life a living hell and destroy his
credit as well.

The best defense is a good offense. Someone being hit simultaneously by
Postal inspectors, the FBI, and a blizzard of lawsuits isn't going to have
the time or the resources to start a slander suit against ONE enemy.

While the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is SO much more
satisfying! Especially if it is being wielded by the full might and majesty
of the United States Government.

Best Regards,

Mike Arman